put book cover here The Biology of Belief


Dr Bruce Lipton


Biology of Belief


Science - Establishment or Proof?

Biology of Belief
This is the start of a bookblog. I got onto the book from a Gee facebook sling-out, I don't know what to call it - but it was little more than clicking a "like". No profound observation that whet my appetite for discovery, but extremely useful - thank you Gee. Anyway I did a bit of searching and discovered some movies that will join this bookblog. I downloaded the book, and you can here. Sat at the beach I loaded the book and began reading the book, The Biology of Belief. This first caught my eye "Suddenly I realized that a cell's life is controlled by the physical and energetic environment and not by its genes.Genes are simply molecular blueprints used in the construction of cells, tissues and organs. The environment serves as a "contractor" who reads and engages those genetic blueprints and is ultimately responsible for the character of a cell's life. It is a single cell's "awareness" of the environment, not its genes, that sets into motion the mechanisms of life." [p15] This seemed straight out of Annie Besant's book on cells - spirituality and theosophy. Then my mind went to Fritjov Kapra's "Tao of Physics" and Zukav's "Dancing Wu Li Masters" - good pedigree, a book that reminded me of the spirit of renewal that was the 60s and early 70s. Continuing reading I next recorded "My new understanding of the nature of life not only corroborated my research, but also, I realized, contradicted another belief of mainstream science that I had been propounding to my students - the belief that allopathic medicine is the only kind of medicine that merits consideration in medical school. By finally giving the energy-based environment its due, it provided the foundation for the science and philosophy of complementary medicine and the spiritual wisdom of ancient and modern faiths as well as for allopathic medicine." [p16] This is what I had felt in the earlier searching that this could be a scientific justification for functional medicine, holistic medicine, or whatever other words you want to use for healing in which we take our own responsibility for our health, and recognise that good health comes from natural input - natural foods straight as Nature provides. Yet at the same time bells are clattering about belief. This starts to indicate a possibility that we create our own health through our minds. The clatter is that it is not belief but harmony with Nature that creates our health, but once we are in harmony that belief adds strength because it is right. This harmony with Nature is what aligns and controls the cells. When you look at Zandtao's three tenets:- Improving the mind

Harmonising our energy

Taking care of our bodies

then you can see that these tenets provide an approach, a personal infrastructure, that can harmonise ourselves with Nature including aligning cells through mental direction, energetic empowerment and physical strength through exercise and good eating. Whilst this includes belief in some ways Zandtao does not promote a conceptual framework that can be applied to cells so that they follow a belief pattern that differs for each human, the "belief pattern" is not individual but that of Nature. After such a good start to the book I hope this is not a science book where science seeks to master Nature - rather than seeking Harmony. Check this short clip from Mercola. It suggests mind controlling the genes:- But I am less concerned now, I get the feeling that when Bruce is talking about mind, he is extending his use of mind to include that of spirit. This is good news for me. As is my practice, when I am focussing on a book I start a bookblog. Here is the bookblog "Biology of Belief".

Science - Establishment or Proof?
What I liked so much about the Mercola clip was that it demonstrated that genes controlling man was dogma, and that dogma was a religious principle. Typical of science is that what has become an accepted scientific approach is not based on a scientific proof. The atomic theory I learned at school has been discredited as a means of proper description yet I was taught it as facts. I never got into biology so the issue of genes never came up, but it has always been a typically scientific causal principle that never gave a good picture for me. Genes as building blocks for man seems ludicrous to me yet genetics appears to work from that basis. This appears to be a significant part of science's answers as to how man works - by the direction of genes. To me that is ludicrous biut that has never stopped science. What about my favourite? There is no chi. No-one can tell me that, because I have felt it. But I have a scientific friend who tells me that the chi exercises people do create the physical strength, so the "swatting flies of Tai Chi, causes muscular development". Interesting hypothesis with no experimental proof, simply a theory that fits in with established science and established science needs no questioning. What is required is insight and the basis of Bruce's work on this view of biology came from insight. Excellent.

Send comment:- Tags -
Back to blog entries table